Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86952 Case Number: LCR11021 Section / Act: S67 Parties: PEERAGE LTD - and - ITGWU |
Dispute concerning an increase in pay under the 26th wage round in respect of 7 workers.
Recommendation:
5. The Court noting the Union's willingness to co-operate in any
productivity proposals recommends that the Company make the
following offer in relation to the 26th wage round claim:-
3 months' pay pause.
5% from 1st January, 1987 to 31st October, 1987.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86952 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11021
CC861654 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11021
Parties: PEERAGE (IRELAND) LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Dispute concerning an increase in pay under the 26th wage
round in respect of 7 workers.
Background:
2. The Company which is based in Birr since 1957 is owned by
Peerage U.K. which in turn is part of the Ferguson Industrial
Holding Company. It currently employs 13 workers mainly in the
manufacture and distribution of brassware products which are sold
principally on the Irish market. Over the years the manufacturing
end of business has not been making a profit and is subsidised by
the distribution end. The 25th wage round expired on 30th
September, 1986. The present wage scale is polishers - #121 a
week; boxmakers - #116; and general operatives #107. There are no
bonus schemes in operation. There is however a profit sharing
scheme in the Company but little or no money has been paid out
under this scheme in recent years. The Union sought an increase
in pay under the 26th wage round. The Company did not make any
offer and the matter was referred to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court on 9th October, 1986. A conciliation conference
was held on 2nd December, 1986 ( a date suitable to both parties).
At the conciliation conference the Union quantified their claim as
a request for 10% increase over 12 months. This was rejected by
the Company. As no agreement could be reached the matter was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing was held in Portlaoise on 10th February,
1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The first few years of British involvement were marked
by considerable financial success. This was due in no
small measure to the extensive co-operation and
flexibility of the workers in spite of very little
capital investment.
(b) During discussions the Company persisted in comparing
productivity levels at Birr with the British
equivalents. Such comparisons are totally invalid
given the respective mechanisation in the U.K. etc.
However the workers have persistently declared a
willingness to discuss improved productivity - to date
there has been no positive response from management.
(c) The present rate of wages is far below the industrial
average wage and it is putting a strain on the workers'
familial and personnel needs.
Company's arguments:
4. (i) The Company has managed to maintain stable employment
over the years as a result of vigorous marketing of its
products and the subsidisation of the manufacturing
operation by the distribution end of the business.
This has tended to divert the focus of attention from
the inefficiencies of the manufacturing end of the
business at Birr.
(ii) The Managing Director who has ultimate responsibility
for Peerage Ireland met with the employees in late 1986
and made it clear that in order to pay some increase in
pay the productivity levels in Birr would have to
increase significantly. Furthermore the Company would
have to show a profit from its operation for a period
of six months.
(iii) Other problems facing Birr are competition coming in
particularly from cheap foreign imports emanating from
the Far East countries and the general reduction in
consumer demand for products in the "luxury goods" end
of the market.
(iv) Cash flow is also severely affected by delays in
getting payment from customers and bad debts.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court noting the Union's willingness to co-operate in any
productivity proposals recommends that the Company make the
following offer in relation to the 26th wage round claim:-
3 months' pay pause.
5% from 1st January, 1987 to 31st October, 1987.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
__________________________
4th March, 1987 Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.